Vintage tubes and output transformers or JFETs and MOSFETs? These two stunning looking amplifiers are both fully balanced, but in very, very different ways and obviously based on totally different technologies. They both looks the fabulous, but how do they compare when you give them a listen? Here is what I found setting them up side by side, listening to each of them track by track, using four great headphones, namely the Audeze LCD-3, the Shure SRH1840, the Hifiman HE-6 and the Sennheiser HD650. I will indicate preferences with advanced mathematical symbols: “A > B” means A is preferred to B, “A>=B” means a slight preference, while “A >< B” indicates that they are equally good but different.
Track by track comparison
Thomas Dybdahl – “This love is here to stay”
LCD-3. Things sound better separated with the WA22. Every instrument and vocal tone is more pronounced I also like the presentation, it feels more natural. The Mjolnir makes this track a bit flatter sounding. It feels like a slightly different mix, with less focus on the main instruments, but more on the background. The singer doesn’t stand out as much. Only plus for the Mjolnir is that the bass feels a bit more textured. The bass of WA22 is slightly bloated in comparison, though still great in a fuller way. WA22 > Mjolnir
SRH1840: I get the same result here, preferring the WA22 for the same reasons as above. WA22 > Mjolnir
With the HE-6 things change a bit. These headphones are hard to drive, but the WA22 does surprisingly well. It doesn’t have the tight grip and deep-end extension as the Mjolnir has with HE-6, so it is tempting to give the Mjolnir a win here. But then, if you can live with the slightly lesser bass quality, I think the WA22 gives a nicer presentation in the mids. WA22 >< Mjolnir
HE-500.The Mjolnir is nice with HE500, I just feel the WA22 presents a warmer, more dynamic and more spacious soundscape. WA22>Mjolnir
HD650 Mjolnir does a good job, but on the WA22, things open up quite a bit, and the sweeter tone makes WA22 the preferred one. WA22 > Mjolnir
Chick Corea – “Pledge for Peace”
LCD-3 Also here I like the more natural feel of he WA22, and things also sound better separated. The Mjolnir gets all the detail, but since nothing feels like it stands out, again the music sounds flatter. I don’t feel the WA22 misses any detail here, and still it is more engaging and natural. WA22 >Mjolnir
SRH1840 I get the same result, preferring the WA22 for the same reasons. WA22 > Mjolnir
HE-6 Again, the Mjolnir has the advantage in the lower regions with its tighter grip. Aoart from that, however, the WA22 still makes different elements in the music stand out more and offers the more natural tonality. Mjolnir might be called the more neutral, but the WA22 is by no means dark and muddy, it actually feels clearer overall than the Mjolnir. Not necessarily more detailed, but still. WA22 >< Mjolnir
HE-500 The WA22 is again more spacious, warmer. Though, the more polite sounding Mjolnir has an appeal and I find myself enjoying it quite a bit.In a way Mjolnir feels more effortless, but in a bit too polite way. WA22 >< Mjolnir.
HD650. This track has its charm on both amplifiers. With the WA22 you are closer to music, but the less up front style of the Mjolnir lets your attention focus more on the minute details. WA22 >< Mjolnir
Radiohead – Moring Bell
LCD-3 Also here, the Mjolnir is a tad flatter sounding. They WA22 just flows nicer. Mjolnir feels a bit too polite in comparison. WA22 > Mjolnir
Using the SRH1840 I get the same result. I also notice that the Mjolnir makes the vocals quite a bit drier. Some might like that, tough, I don’t.
With the HE-6, again the Mjolinir has the bass, the WA22 has the rest. WA22>Mjolnir
On the HE-500, the Mjolnier feels drier, the WA22 has more flesh. WA22 >Mjolnir
HD650 – I find Radiohead often a bit bright and Mjolnir doesn’t help out here: WA22 > Mjolnir
Jøkleba – Muggen Fallskjerm
LCD-3 Here it is harder to make a clear winner. This track has so clearly defined instruments, that the usual complaints aren’t an issue with the Mjolnir. Though still slightly flatter in it’s presentation dynamically speaking, it feels just a slight bit tighter. Constrained but tight. I have to call it a tie. WA22 >< Mjolnir
SRH1840 I slightly preferring the WA22 for the same reasons as usual. WA22 > Mjolnir
HE-6 Basically it is the same as on earlier tracks, and the natural tone gives the WA22 the advantage. WA22 > Mjolnir
Same goes for HE-500. WA22>Mjolnir
The Mjolnir makes the HD650 snappier, but harder sounding, I prefer WA22 which still is punchy, yet have more room for the delicate neuances. WA22>Mjolnir
Emerson String Quartet – Poco Allegro
LCD-3 Mjolnir has a slightly drier bite on the strings here, which gives it a bit more feel of immediate texture. At the same time the WA22 still has better separation and some of that warmth. Not my favorite piece for the LCD3, though. WA22>=Mjolnir
1840 I prefer the WA22 for its more natural presentation, but both amps are really engaging. WA22>Mjolnir
HE-500 The drier character of the Mjolnir plays very well with the HE-500 on this track. Mjolnir > WA22
HD650 sounds warmer and more delicious on the wa22 here. WA22 > Mjolnir
Olga Konkova – As Before
LCD-3 Once again, the WA22 is slightly more open and separated. WA22 > Mjolnir
SRH1840 I might be preferring the WA22 when plugging in the 1840, but with so slight a margin that I have to call it a tie. No significant differences to write about. WA22 = Mjolnir.
HD650 The less euphonic Mjolnir makes the HD650 feel more relaxed on this track, making it a nicer combo. Mjolnir > WA22
HE-6 the vocals are warmer, piano is clearer, yet it feels just as tight. Except again in the deepest regions of the bass, but that makes practically no difference on this track. WA22 > Mjolnir
HE-500 I feel I get a bigger soundstage the WA22. But again the the drier Mjolnir gives a stronger sense of detail in the mids. WA22 > Mjolnir
Mahler Sympohny no 2 – track 3
LCD-3 With this track it is harder to pick a winner than with the others, so much is happening in this piece that all merges into a symphonic whole (which often is the intention of using a symphony orchestra…) Mjolnir makes all a bit smoother, it all blends into an integrated whole, whilst I feel the WA22 makes the stuff that is supposed to stand out, stand out just a bit more. Both do a really good job.
WA22 > Mjolnir
SRH1840 I find it hard to declare a winner here, it is too close to tell. WA22 = Mjolnir
On the already warm HD650 the more euphonic mids on the WA22 might get a bit too much compared to the Mjolnirs more polite presentation, which in turn makes me feel more space. Mjolnir > WA22
HE-6 On this piece I put the WA22 almost to the max, normally I have it at 11-13 oclock with the HE6. Though really enjoying the Mjolnir, when I swap to the WA22, I just feel everything opens up a bit, really. WA22>Mjolnir
HE-500 On the WA22, it feels like there is more room, the Mjolnir kind of of flattens things down a bit, or maybe it brings all things more equal. Some details, (coughing etc) are more upfront on the Mjolnir, which makes sense since it feels like the brighter one. It is really hard to pick a favorite hear, the relaxed but detailed drier Mjolnir or the more spacious and warm WA22. WA22>= Mjolnir
Radiohead – Go to sleep
LCD-3 The steel strings might have a bit more “bite” on the Mjolnir, but only by a tad. The vocals feel more natural one the WA22. WA22 >= Mjolnir
SRH1840 I still prefer the WA22. By a tad.
HD650 The Mjolnir brings out a nice crispiness, making me prefer the Mjolnir. Mjolnir > WA22
HE-6 With the notoriously hard to drive HE6, the Mjolnir shows its strength, offering a tighter grip. I am again surprised how well the less powerful WA22 fares, but it in the bass especially, it misses a lot of detail. Not that you realize it before you swap amps, though. But this time the Mosfets of the Schiit gives the edge. Mjolnir >WA22
HE500 The WA22’s more euphonic character is hard to beat, this song also feels more tidy on the WA22, maybe because the vocals get to dominate more. WA22 > Mjolnir
Conclusion
Mjolnir is a good amp, and keeps up in many ways to the far more expensive WA22. Though, for my taste the WA22 is just a better amp. And for more than double the price, that should be expected.
Sound signature
There are clear general differences in sound signature that goes along the usual tube vs solid state stereotype. The bass is generally tighter on the Mjolnir and slightly fuller on the WA22. The mids are warmer sounding, more present, forward and euphonic on the WA22. The highs seem to be equally extended on both, but the Mjolnir has a bit more edginess in the treble region. Some like a bit more “bite”, while others find it to be less pleasant sounding. In essence this makes Mjolnir a “drier” sounding amp.
Detail level
I did find both amps to be very detailed. They both are revealing, but the WA22 is revealing in a more enjoyable way. On the Mjolnir coughs, unintended instrument sounds etc. got more of my attention. I attribute to the increased quantity of treble, and I usually found it to be a negative thing.
Soundstage
I was a bit puzzled by the Mjolnir. It makes the instruments sound more even leveled, the individual instruments stand less out from the crowd, everything feels a bit more constrained, and lastly the soundstage depth is way shallower than with the WA22. I was truly really impressed by the WA22 here, how it had great separation and warmth at the same time.
Matching
I was a bit surprised to what extent that across the variations of headphones and genres I played, there still was a very consistent pattern. Mostly I preferred the WA22, and mostly for the same reasons. I sometimes liked the Mjolnir for being less euphonic than the WA22 on tracks and headphones that were already euphonic enough on the Mjolnir, and sometimes the bass was noticeably better textured on the Mjolnir.
Concluding the conclusion
As you probably have figured out: For the most part, I found myself liking the WA22 more. It has a more organic forward sound, yet detailed and with better sense of separation and depth than the Mjolnir. The only place I felt the Mjolnir had a slight advantage was in bass texture, but that wasn’t really much of a difference. It surprised me that even the HE-6 generally played better in my ears with the WA22, proving to me that raw power isn’t everything after all, even for the HE-6.
The Mjolnir has its advantages and is the more powerful amp, and generally has a tighter grip on the bass. Though, at least for my kind of music and my volume levels, I still prefer the WA22 especially due to its more open and organic character, warmer mids and smoother highs.
Don’t get me wrong. The Mjolnir is a great amplifier. If you are in the market for an amplifier at that price point, you are getting a nice piece of gear. But you sometimes get a better amp for more money, and WA22 is one of them.
Associated Equipment
Source: Lossless FLAC via SB Touch over SPDIF/coax to a Violectric V800 DAC
Tubes: WA22 equipped with Mullard GZ34, TS5998 and Sylvania VT231 tubes, all NOS.
